Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (352834)	10/4/2007 6:09:00 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1584741

Over or under 1.5 kg isn't the only criteria. Different countries use different criteria, not all of which are based on weight at all, such as "an infant must be at least 30 centimeters long at birth to be counted as living." Also "Japan counts only births to Japanese nationals living in Japan, not abroad. Finland, France and Norway, by contrast, do count births to nationals living outside of the country. Belgium includes births to its armed forces living outside Belgium but not births to foreign armed forces living in Belgium. Finally, Canada counts births to Canadians living in the U.S., but not Americans living in Canada." and "...some infant deaths are tabulated by date of registration and not by date of occurrence... Whenever the lag between the date of occurrence and date of registration is prolonged and therefore, a large proportion of the infant-death registrations are delayed, infant-death statistics for any given year may be seriously affected." (although that last one is probably a minor factor, and definitly would be a minor factor if you have multiple years of data to compare) There is no reasonable way to say that adjusting for all these factors puts the US at the top of the rich country rankings, but it would move the US up. Than there is the fact that however you measure infant mortality it isn't purely determined by difference in health insurance. In fact it might not be primarily determined by such differences. That's a bigger point than Eberstad's, points about the different measurements. Combine the two and at best infant mortality would be a very weak proxy for the benefits of particular health care insurance setups. Life expectancy would most likely be an even weaker proxy.